건물명도
1. The defendant shall each issue in order of 3, 4, 5, 6, and 3 of the annexed drawings among the real estate listed in the annexed list to the plaintiff.
1. In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 2-1, 2, and Gap evidence No. 3 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff, on December 13, 2012, attached drawings No. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 3 among the second floor of the real estate in the attached list owned by the plaintiff, attached Table No. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 3 (hereinafter "the housing of this case") are leased as KRW 1,00,000 from January 12, 2013 to January 12, 2015 (hereinafter "the lease contract of this case"), and the plaintiff sent each of the above facts to the defendant that he/she would not renew the lease contract of this case to the defendant on September 29, 2014 and January 12, 2015.
According to the above facts, since the lease contract of this case was terminated upon the expiration of the term, the defendant is obligated to order the plaintiff to explain the house of this case.
2. As to the defendant's defense, the defendant did not return the lease deposit by deposit method, or did not notify the plaintiff of his intention of rejection of renewal six months prior to the expiration of the contract, and the lease contract of this case was automatically renewed and thus did not have an obligation to clarify the house of this case.
According to Article 639 and Article 635 of the Civil Act, if a lessee fails to raise an objection within a reasonable period after the expiration of the lease term when the lessee uses the leased object and continues to enjoy profits, the lessor is deemed to have renewed the lease under the same conditions as the former one. In this case, the lessor may notify the termination of the lease pursuant to Article 635 of the Civil Act and the termination becomes effective six months after the notification of the termination of the lease. However, the above provisions are different prior to the expiration of the lease term.